Where do you rank our coach?

[td00]

I just came across last year's ballot for the COY and Woodson finished tied for 8th with of all people, Phil Jackson.
Hard to believe that Jackson didn't get more credit, and Woodson received 1 1st place vote in the process. Was that Sekou?

I was just curious to know where everyone thought Woodson ranked in the NBA. Does he have strengths that make him a good coach for these guys? He has hung in there and achieved success with this main core.

This is his last year of his contract, so I thought this was a good time to discuss if we can reach the Finals in the next year or 2?

Here's last year's results: http://www.nba.com/2009/news/features/j ... index.html

[azuresou1]

He's a defensive coach who has taken one philosophy (switch on 95% of screens, force turnovers) and done it pretty well. However, he doesn't seem to be the best at getting the most out of his players, and he is probably a bottom 5 coach in terms of offense

[killbuckner]

He is an average coach. But I think he gets sold way short on offense. The Hawks were a top 10 offense in the league this season. The teams ahead of them had far superior personnel on offense. If the Hawks had a different coach I don't at all know that they would have been better on offense .

And I also think its a bit overblown to say that Woodson doesn't get good production out of his players. He got spectacular production out of Bibby and Flip Murray last season. For the most part when guys have left here they haven't done massively better. (Diaw is the one guy you can talk about and I think that was just a brilliant move by D'antoni.

[killbuckner]

I'll just say this again for the people who think that Woodson is one of the 5 worst offensive coaches in the league. This season here is the list of teams that had a better offense than the Hawks. You tell me which teams you think the Hawks have better offensive personnel than since coaching is obviously the thing holding the Hawks back.

Portland
Phoenix
Lakers
Cavs
Mavericks
Celtics
Nuggets
Jazz
Warriors

Seriously... thats the list. All of those teams have better firepower on offense than the Hawks do.

[azuresou1]

The Hawks have more offensive tools than the Jazz, Portland, and better offensive tools than GS. Also, we wash with the Mavs.

Jazz: Deron scores well for a point, Boozer missed half the season, Okur and Brewer are solid all around but not really outstanding (Okur has excellent outside shooting, but a pedestrian low post game). Millsap and Korver have limited games. Despite this, they had a better offense, because they played to their strengths: Okur and Korver space the floor out, so Millsap doesn't need to play more than 10 ft from the basket.

Portland: B-Roy is about the same as JJ, but slightly better. LMA is a pretty decent PF, but not outstanding. Outlaw is a SF/PF tweener who's strength lies in slashing, and Rudy is a guard who can't really create for himself well. What about that roster screams 'better than the Hawks?' B-Roy is slightly better than JJ, LMA is slightly better than Horf, Marvin is better than Outlaw, and Bibby is about equal at this point with Rudy... and then you have Smoove, who is also about equivalent to LMA, which means all things point to the Hawks having more quality tools than the Blazers. Despite them having weaker talent, they had the best ORTG in the league - because of coaching and leadership.

GSW: Everyone on that team not named Andris Biedrins, Anthony Randolph, or Ronny Turiaf can drain the three. That's about it. I'm not placing much stock in their offensive rating, because they clearly cannibalize their defensive rating to get that offense.

Mavs: Obviously Dirk is easily the best player on either team. However, we have a deeper pool of 2nd-option talent. I'm not going to say that we're a better team than them, but I do feel that our overall level of talents are highly comparable.

What's interesting to note is that of all those teams listed, only one team runs a heavy amount of iso, and that's Cleveland. Even the Lakers don't run as much iso as it seems we do, and they have Kobe.

We aren't maximizing our strengths by having JJ run iso at the top of the key while everyone else stands around. If anything, we're maximizing our weaknesses. Instead of Horford in the post working on stiffs (i.e. 85% of the big men in the league), we have him relegated to cleanup duty. Instead of Smoove acting as a cutter to the basket, we have him as a perimeter shooter. And instead of Bibby acting as the spot-up shooter and facilitator a la J-Kidd (with better shooting and worse passing), we have him as our 2nd option. He took almost as many shots as Al and Zaza combined. We play like a perimeter team, which takes our weaknesses (poor shooting, mediocre rebounding) and amplifies them, while ignoring our strengths (great athleticism around the board, strengths and weaknesses that mesh with each other).

[killbuckner]

wow.,.. I didn't think even the homeristic of the homers would say the Hawks have better offensive personnel than those teams. First of all Joe is not on the same level as either Deron Williams or Dirk. Second of all I just don't see how you can at all think that the Hawks supporting players are in the same league offensively as Boozer, Milsap, and Okur or Kidd, Terry, and Howard.

The Hawks have only 1 person on the roster who can consistently draw a doubleteam and find the open man. The hawks have absolutely no post threat at all. Al horford has never shown any ability to exploit weak defenders. Josh Smith is obviously a flawed offensive player. Bibby had a resurgent year under Woodson. Marvin improved this year under Woodson. But I seriously doubt that any non-Hawks fan would take the Hawks roster on offense over those other teams. Blaming Woodson for the Hawks not finishing ahead of the Jazz and Mavs on offense is just ridiculous in my opinion.

[azuresou1]

Way to read my post.

Deron and Dirk are obviously both better.
Boozer missed HALF THE SEASON.
Millsap is a glorified hustle player.
Kidd can still create for others, but not for himself.
Terry is skilled and I'd love to have him on the Hawks, but his speed has faded and at this point he succeeds by scoring on younger, inexperienced defenders.
Howard missed around 30 games last season.

Am I to assume you agree with me that our personnel is on paper just as good as the Blazers and their league-leading offense? They too only have one player who can consistently draw a double. They do well because they run a smooth offense.

Or what about the championship Pistons? They didn't have anyone that could consistently draw a double.

Al Horford has shown no ability because he never gets the ball except as a last-ditch effort, or off boards. How are you supposed to develop your big man when you never let him shoot? This is a guy who averaged almost a double-double as a rookie, and is one of our more efficient players, and we instead we have Smoove out at the arc shooting threes.

Bibby should bring up the ball, and then serve as a spot-up shooter or to reset the offense.
Joe should occasionally bring up the ball but not as often as he does right now, and be working around screens to get open shots.
Marvin is doing his job just fine.
Smoove should never be out at the 3 until he develops his shot, and instead should be constantly cutting or setting screens... we'll allow him to take a 3 if he's been doing everything else well and we're up, otherwise he's prohibited.
Al should be more aggressive and also demand the ball more.

I'm going to place Bibby having a good year to him not being in Sacramento anymore, and Marvin's improvement as his own interest in his development. On the other hand, I do believe Woodson is at least partly to blame for Smoove not having developed his game yet, not giving Horford adequate touches, and for working JJ like a farmer working his mule.

[killbuckner]

Wow- I am just astounded. I think it comes down to whether you think that Josh Smith and Al Horford are being misused or whether they are guys who just sort of suck in a halfcourt offense. As a coach I don't think there are a lot of options to effectively use them so I see the offensive personnel on those teams as clearly superior.

Personally when I look at the numbers from last season I think its far more to Woodson's credit that he was able to have a better offense than the Magic, Hornets, and Spurs than to blame him for not finishing ahead of the Mavs, Jazz, and Blazers.

[azuresou1]

I think Smoove and Horford don't particularly excel in halfcourt sets, and then on top of that, they're being misused.

In half court sets, the only time I want to see Josh at the 3pt line is either when he can consistently shoot at least 38% from behind it, or to swing the ball. He really should operate more along the baseline or mid-post area, and like I said, be either setting screens or cutting to the basket.

Horford is no Tim Duncan, but he's hardly a Jason Collins either. He's good enough to manhandle at least 80% of the bigs in this league, and when he gets one of those matchups, we should feed it inside. Take last year vs the Knicks. He dropped 20/14, and we still lost, because even though he was 9/14 and matched up with David Lee, who's probably the worst defensive C in the league and is even more undersized than Horf, we didn't keep feeding him and instead just kept up our normal game plan. Now, compare this to if Joe was shooting 63% in a game. We'd keep feeding the ball until he got benched, either for putting the game out of reach, or for going 5-20. Yet with Horford, the first time he misses a shot, we go away from him.

Hornets have even fewer options than us. Other than CP3 and David West, who do they have? Peja is in the twilight of his career, Tyson Chandler couldn't generate any of his own offense, and... who else do they have? Rasual Butler?

Spurs have always been a defensive, grinding team, and last season Manu was out for like 3/4 of the season, and Timmy and TP missed a whole bunch of games too. A team built around 3 stars and role players won't perform well when all 3 stars are injured.

I'm a little surprised about the Magic, but I feel Dwight should get more touches. Apparently he agrees too.

[killbuckner]

He's good enough to manhandle at least 80% of the bigs in this league,

Right here is where you and I are FAR off. I don't see that Horford has shown the ability to "manhandle" even the most lumbering defenders in the league. He didn't show the ability to manhandle defenders in college either. I just don't see where this belief comes from. I think that Horford is simply not the kind of player who can exploit a poor defender.

[JoshB914]

Woody is in the middle of the pack. Unless we are on a 3+ game losing streak when he suddenly morphs into the "worst coach in the league."

[CViggity]

The Hawks have more offensive tools than the Jazz, Portland, and better offensive tools than GS. Also, we wash with the Mavs.

Jazz: Deron scores well for a point, Boozer missed half the season, Okur and Brewer are solid all around but not really outstanding (Okur has excellent outside shooting, but a pedestrian low post game). Millsap and Korver have limited games. Despite this, they had a better offense, because they played to their strengths: Okur and Korver space the floor out, so Millsap doesn't need to play more than 10 ft from the basket.

Portland: B-Roy is about the same as JJ, but slightly better. LMA is a pretty decent PF, but not outstanding. Outlaw is a SF/PF tweener who's strength lies in slashing, and Rudy is a guard who can't really create for himself well. What about that roster screams 'better than the Hawks?' B-Roy is slightly better than JJ, LMA is slightly better than Horf, Marvin is better than Outlaw, and Bibby is about equal at this point with Rudy... and then you have Smoove, who is also about equivalent to LMA, which means all things point to the Hawks having more quality tools than the Blazers. Despite them having weaker talent, they had the best ORTG in the league - because of coaching and leadership.

GSW: Everyone on that team not named Andris Biedrins, Anthony Randolph, or Ronny Turiaf can drain the three. That's about it. I'm not placing much stock in their offensive rating, because they clearly cannibalize their defensive rating to get that offense.

Mavs: Obviously Dirk is easily the best player on either team. However, we have a deeper pool of 2nd-option talent. I'm not going to say that we're a better team than them, but I do feel that our overall level of talents are highly comparable.

What's interesting to note is that of all those teams listed, only one team runs a heavy amount of iso, and that's Cleveland. Even the Lakers don't run as much iso as it seems we do, and they have Kobe.

We aren't maximizing our strengths by having JJ run iso at the top of the key while everyone else stands around. If anything, we're maximizing our weaknesses. Instead of Horford in the post working on stiffs (i.e. 85% of the big men in the league), we have him relegated to cleanup duty. Instead of Smoove acting as a cutter to the basket, we have him as a perimeter shooter. And instead of Bibby acting as the spot-up shooter and facilitator a la J-Kidd (with better shooting and worse passing), we have him as our 2nd option. He took almost as many shots as Al and Zaza combined. We play like a perimeter team, which takes our weaknesses (poor shooting, mediocre rebounding) and amplifies them, while ignoring our strengths (great athleticism around the board, strengths and weaknesses that mesh with each other).

Wow this is fairly terrible.

[CViggity]

We aren't in the same league with Portland in terms of offense.

Brandon Roy is significantly better than JJ. Andre Miller is significantly better than Bibby. LMA is significantly better than JSmoove (not even close on offense).

Portland is one of if not the best offensive team in the league. It's fairly silly to even compare the Hawks to them on that end.

[CViggity]

In reply to the topic before this thread got hijacked with offense rankings,

Woody is pretty bad. His inability to control JSmoove is pretty inexcusable for a NBA coach. He seems to have an OK defensive system, but this is a team playing below expectation on offense.

I really like how and when he used Flip last year though.

[azuresou1]

Okay, maybe manhandle was the wrong word, because it kind of implies a brutish game a la Shaq or Kendrick Perkins. But Horford definitely has the skills to be an 18/12 guy a la Boozer. He puts on 15 lbs of muscle and more confidence in himself, we're good to go. The muscle he needs to do himself. The confidence, we should be building, and we're not doing that when Bibby gets to jack up 15 shots a night whether they're landing or not, yet we don't give Horford the ball even when he's having a good night and hitting everything.

B-Roy is better than JJ, but not 'significantly' so. Andre Miller wasn't on that team last year, and Bibby is better than Blake. LMA is better than Horford or Smoove, true... but who else do they have? Outlaw? Rudy? On paper, we're approximately equal, because Roy and LMA being better than JJ and Smoove is negated by the fact that the rest of our starters are better than their starters by a fair margin.

I don't understand. You agree with me that Woody isn't getting the most out of his players when Smoove just does whatever the hell he wants, that his team is playing well below their talent level on offense, but you disagree with my overall assessment?

[evildallas]

COY voting is not related to actual coaching ability as much as it is exceeding expectations. If the media think your personnel suck and you finish well, the coach gets votes. If they think you have great personnel and come up short of lofty expectations you don't. An increase of 10 wins from the previous season gets some votes regardless of the actual coaching job.

I've heard of studies that show that even the best coaches are worth less than 5 games in the standings. If that's true then it would be hard for anyone to really rank the whole list of coaches.

I seen Woodson make mistakes during his tenure that should have gotten him fired and I've seen some other coaches think circles around him. I've also seen him out-think some other coaches with COY awards on their mantle. It's hard for me to think of him as anything higher than somewhere in the middle of the coaching pack. I will say that's an improvement because as I watched him learn on the job I would have sworn that he was among the worst.

The other point I would bring up is that should be about coaching staff not just the man at the top. I think the team improved in that area last year with the hiring of Jim Todd, but I also think that Woodson doesn't delegate enough to make best us of a staff. In Boston and LA (Lakers), they have assistants that are responsible for the D. In Cleveland, they have an offensive coordinator. Woodson lacks imagination on the offensive end and turning some of the responsibilities for that to someone else might help overall coaching staff performance.

[CViggity]

Okay, maybe manhandle was the wrong word, because it kind of implies a brutish game a la Shaq or Kendrick Perkins. But Horford definitely has the skills to be an 18/12 guy a la Boozer. He puts on 15 lbs of muscle and more confidence in himself, we're good to go. The muscle he needs to do himself. The confidence, we should be building, and we're not doing that when Bibby gets to jack up 15 shots a night whether they're landing or not, yet we don't give Horford the ball even when he's having a good night and hitting everything.

B-Roy is better than JJ, but not 'significantly' so. Andre Miller wasn't on that team last year, and Bibby is better than Blake. LMA is better than Horford or Smoove, true... but who else do they have? Outlaw? Rudy? On paper, we're approximately equal, because Roy and LMA being better than JJ and Smoove is negated by the fact that the rest of our starters are better than their starters by a fair margin.

I don't understand. You agree with me that Woody isn't getting the most out of his players when Smoove just does whatever the hell he wants, that his team is playing well below their talent level on offense, but you disagree with my overall assessment?

Roy is significantly better than JJ, you have to take the blinders off. Roy is a top 10 player in the league, JJ is top 30.

If you really believe the Hawks are on par with Portland, I doubt you are ever going to listen to or understand the overwhelming evidence against you. Portland is better and deeper at every single position. They are going to be maybe the 2 seed in the West, where the Hawks would be 7 or 8.

[CViggity]

I mean seriously

Miller/Blake >>>>>> Bibby/Teague
Roy/Rudy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> JJ/Flip
Outlaw/Batum > Marvin/Evans (this is the closest one, but Batum is a good bit better than Evans)
LMA>>>JSmoove
Oden/Pryz>>>>>>>>Horford/Zaza

I love the Hawks and I often make silly arguments when defending them, but even I can't drink the kool-aid that says we compare to Portland (the most efficient offensive team in the league last year) offensively.

[azuresou1]

Roy is Top 10, JJ is probably Top 25-ish. I freely admit that. Nevertheless, the dropoff from Top 3 (Bron/Kobe/Wade, in whatever order) to Top 10 (Roy-ish territory) is bigger than the dropoff from Top 10 to Top 25.

They didn't have Miller last year, and we would have Crawford this year, so either way your roster would be incorrect, discounting the absurdly hyperbolic amount of greater than signs you have. Their depth is better, I will freely admit that, but our starting unit is just as good.

Blake < Bibby
Roy >> JJ
Outlaw < Marvin
LMA >> Smoove
Pryzbilla << Horford

That to me is similar enough to say that the Blazers may be better on offense, but their talent is not absurdly out of our league as you would suggest.

[azuresou1]

This is talent-wise, not production wise, since clearly we don't use our talents and strengths to our advantage. Young, very athletic team that can run, and we play the 6th slowest pace in the league?